IN THE DELHI STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION Date of Institution: 06.08.2014 Date of hearing: 18.10.2022 Date of Decision: 02.05.2023 FIRST APPEAL NO.- 778/2014 IN THE MATTER OF LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA., Through its duly Constituted Attorney, Manager (Legal & H.P.F.)

Divisional Office, I

25, Kasturba Gandhi Marg, New Delhi 110001 (Through: Mr. Abhishek Nanda, Advocate)

...Appellant VERSUS

1. Mr. Raj Kumar Gupta R/o C-5/ S-2, Dilshad Garden, New Delhi 110095 (Through: Mr. S.P. Gairola, Advocate)

…Respondent No. 1.

2. Mr. Gurvinder Singh R/o F-149, Mangal Bazar Road, Laxmi Nagar, New Delhi 110092 Also at :

S – 273, School Block, Shakarpur, New Delhi 110092 …Respondent No. 2.

CORAM:

HON’BLE JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL (PRESIDENT)

HON’BLE MS. PINKI, MEMBER (JUDICIAL)

Present: Mr. Abhishek Nanda, counsel for the appellant.

None for the respondents.

PER: HON’BLE MS. PINKI, MEMBER (JUDICIAL)

JUDGMENT

1. The facts of the case as per the District Forum record are :

The present appeal has been filed by the appellant/OP impugning the order dated 30.05.2014 passed in CC No. 736/13 by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum - IX (East District),Convenient Shopping Centre, Saini Enclave, Delhi – 92 necessary contents was allowed.

“The complainant has taken the policy no. 123874947 in the year 2007 and deposited a premium of Rs. 10,000/- two other installments were paid in 2008 and 2009. Thus, total amount paid was Rs. 30,000/- till 2009. This policy was purchased through Sh. Gurvinder Singh, Agent of the LIC who has shown a circular and payment schedule clarifying that only three installments of Rs. 10,000/- each has to be deposited and Rs. 16,07,554/- will be refunded after 20 years. It is only the assurance of the OP 2 that the complainant deposited three installments. Complainant received a letter dated 12.12.2012, thereafter he contacted the Branch Manager, Sh. Anil Lal, how his policy could be terminated without prior intimation and without any fault of the complainant. The payment of Rs. 26,856/- on 13.02.2013 after six years of the said policy is unjustified when he should have got Rs. 71,608/- after six years. This amounts to unfair trade practice on the part of the OP. The complainant has prayed for balance amount of Rs. 42,452/-, compensation of Rs.

25,000/- for mental pain and agony as well as cost of litigation of Rs. 11,000/-“.

2. The District Forum after taking into consideration the material available on record passed the order dated 30.05.2014, whereby it held as under:

“The contention of the complainant is based on Money Plus (Growth Fund), Paper No. B filed with the complaint which shows that for three years premium of Rs. 10,000/- each to be paid and after 20 years, the total amount to be paid will be Rs. 16,07,554/-. The complainant put emphasis upon the brochure wherein it has been clearly mentioned that only three yearly installments are to be paid and thereafter part installments will be adjusted in the installments. The complainant submitted that the OP has failed to file on record any terms and conditions which must have been signed by the complainant requiring him to deposit the yearly installment of Rs. 10,000/- for 20 years. He further submitted that is not the case of the complainant that he has paid the premium in 2010. He has paid only these premiums, firstly in 2007, secondly in 2008 and thirdly in 2010. In para 5 of the written statement, the OP had come up with the plea that the complainant paid the premium in 2010 and thereafter he stopped the payment of premium. This is contrary to the case of the complainant. No document has been filed by the OP to prove that 4^th installment was deposited by the complainant. Secondly, there is not an iota of evidence placed on behalf of the OP that any notice was issued to the complainant specifying therein the part payment of the installment which he has to pay in accordance with the plan which has been filed along with complaint. This plan has not been dis